RIP Philo

Why did you tube succeed?

"YouTube eliminated the hassles with sharing and watching videos by using the just-released Adobe Flash support for video, then drove rapid adoption through offering embedded widgets and distribution of copyrighted content."

I used youtube because there was interesting stuff on it. I never posted a video. I don't know why people flocked to it to post. Was it really the embedded video?
Permalink son of parnas 
March 19th, 2007 5:18pm
Sometimes these feel like just so stories. Why do humans have fingernails? Why, for socially enhancing grooming. nervous ticks and spreading communicable diseases, of course.

Weren't there a dozen youtubes (including google video itself) and mostly only youtube succeeded? Or at least it succeed by the power law.
Permalink Send private email sour grape snowflake 
March 19th, 2007 5:25pm
You know why it succeeded.  Easy, it was easy.  No popups, or select between 5 options, medium-high, low bitrate BS.  Just the freaking video.  Simple controls, you can fastforward, rewind, stop.  And it is fast.  I know I normally dont expect a 30MB download.

On another note, my linux machine loads the videos pretty fast, compared to a comparable Windows machine.
Permalink Bot Berlin 
March 19th, 2007 5:30pm
there are others out there with more features, or who pay content creators. why don't people post their stuff there more?
Permalink $-- 
March 19th, 2007 5:43pm
Two reasons for Youtube success:

1) The videos just play.  I *still* have issues with videos not playing in Firefox from time to time because of some wacked out video player a site is using.  And they are usually horrendous to use.

2) Embedding/sharing is easy.  Sites everywhere were very quickly embedding youtube videos in their sites in blog posts, articles, etc.

Although I've never used it, I've heard that uploading videos is a snap to do as well.
Permalink Send private email Wayne 
March 19th, 2007 5:44pm
oh yeah, youtube founders didn't spend time tryong to figure out a busines smodel. It's easy to succeed if your goals are low, or non-existent.
Permalink Send private email sour grape snowflake 
March 19th, 2007 5:50pm
I'd have to say making it easy to embed videos in myspace pages, plus a running start would do it.
Permalink Send private email Philo 
March 19th, 2007 8:59pm
+1 Wayne. The rest is just capitalizing on 1% of the population's proclivity to want to entertain everybody else.
Permalink Send private email ~~~x 
March 19th, 2007 10:05pm
It's a usability issue that let it take hold. It's easy to use and it works on every browser without trouble. Signing up is easy, you don't even have to use your real name. You can post stuff without it being approved. So the whole process of posting and getting videos is ten times easier than any of the competitors.

That's the first step. Now BECAUSE of that step, a lot of people were able to post and watch interesting content that they created. Most of the traffic there is people posting vlog entries, original short films, demonstrations, all kinds of stuff. I think I read people are uploading 60,000 videos an hour. Only a small portion of that is copyrighted commercial stuff. Without those things, the traffic would still be about the same. But not being anal about it means that it's easier to upload everything. It's very nice to post a rant about something and it is instantly available worldwide.
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 19th, 2007 11:08pm
> But not being anal about it means

I dunno. I think had lower barriers to entry, if you know what I mean.
Permalink blahty heartsheep 
March 20th, 2007 12:30am
Dunno if this is relevant but you have to agree she has a knack for product naming:
Permalink trollop 
March 20th, 2007 2:20am

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other topics: March, 2007 Other topics: March, 2007 Recent topics Recent topics